[Pc_Support] Re: USB backups -- for 4-7GB, DVD-R is ideal ...

[Bryan J. Smith]

On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 22:49 -0400, Sally Welch wrote:
> Bryan,
> I have searched your blog and didn't find the answer to my question.

I just started it a few months ago.  Sooner or later I'll dump a good
decade of past info into it.

> Could you please give me your advice?  I work with a small business that
> has a Linux server and 2 Windows XP workstations.  I am backing up
> workstation data to the server, but offsite backups are needed.  The
> owner doesn't want the data backed up to a server elsewhere since he
> doesn't own these other servers (privacy/security concerns).
> There is currently about 4-7gb data to backup.

What has a native capacity of 4.7GB (4.35GiB), costs only $45 for the
drive, is less than $0.25 per unit media and works 100% with Linux?

An LG GSA-4167B (Black):  
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827136063  

They also have a Beige version:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827136064  

If you want to save a few bucks ($3-5), you can go with the older
GSA-4165 or 4163 series (do _not_ buy a refurb though, they never last).
Some of the earlier 416x just don't do some of the higher speed dual-
layer, although they _all_ do 16x DVD-R and DVD+R recording.

If you need a backup program, my old "back2cd" works for DVDs as well as
CDs.  I get about 9-12GB on a single DVD-R:  
http://www.samag.com/documents/sam0204c/  

> The owner was thinking about purchasing two external hard drives for
> backups.  One of the drives would be taken home for offsite storage on
> an alternating basis.  I like the idea, but I am concerned that
> backups would take a long time with the 2.0 USB hard drives being
> considered.

The main issue is the reliability of _off-line_ ATA drives and their
intolerance to _shock_.  But if you still want to go that way, the new
Seagate NL35 ("Near-Line") drives are the best you'll get.
http://www.samag.com/documents/sam0509a/0509a_s1.htm  

[ As part of this main article on network backup:
http://www.samag.com/documents/sam0509a/ ]

BTW, FireWire tends to have better, sustained transfer rates.  I won't
get into the long engineering babble on why.  ;->

> Would flash memory be better?

No, definitely _not_!  They are _slower_ because EEPROM takes a long
time to write.  And you _only_ get 1,000 writes per cell on average.

Yes, the solid state EEPROM solves the reliability of high-density
platters, but they introduce a performance and rewrite lifetime issue.

> I see 4gb USB memory sticks for $230 or so, though they would probably
> need four of these.  There are a couple USB ports available on the
> workstation, and two more on the keyboard.
> I believe that speed of backups will be much more important to the
> users than the disparity in price between USB hard drives and USB
> memory sticks.  The smaller size of the sticks would be an added
> bonus.

EEPROM writes are typically _slower_ than today's bursting hard drives.
Granted, USB 2.0 is more of the "bottleneck" issue, which puts EEPROM
and fixed disk on the same field of performance, but I would not go the
EEPROM route.

> Is there something that I am not considering?  What do you advise?

DVD-R

If you record DVD-R via cdrecord+DVDpatch (standard with most 2.6
distros, and many late 2.4 distros) in disc-at-once (DaO) mode, you get
a media that will last 10+ years.  It's also very portable and cheap.

Also note that you can use my script to just master the .iso files, then
record them to DVD-R on whatever system you want.  I.e., you could put
LG GSA-4167 drives in all systems.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith     b.j.smith at ieee.org     http://thebs413.blogspot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The best things in life are NOT free - which is why life is easiest if
you save all the bills until you can share them with the perfect woman